Fair division of household responsibilities vs. income

[Anonymous]

Fair isn’t equal.

I say this to my kids all the time but it applies in relationships too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the expectations should be based on work hours, not income. Across the board, pay is not generally reflective of how long or hard you work, some industries just pay a lot more than others.

That said, as someone who earns about 70% more than my husband and feels the after work/dinner scramble, lower the weeknight cooking expectations so one of you can get it on the table fast. We do a lot of leftovers of meals cooked on the weekend, pasta once a week, frozen food once a week, breakfast for dinner, and so on.

+1. It should obviously be based on total work hours, unless 1 person chooses a very intense but low-paying job, which they shouldn’t do with kids. But both OP and her DH work similar hours. Even if a family has a SAHP, both parents need to contribute on evenings and weekends.

This is not living in reality. Should a surgeon who earns 900K with a pre-school teacher husband who earns 70K expect to do a 50/50 split of chores?

If the surgeon works more hours than the preschool teacher, no. If they work the same number of hours, yes. If the surgeon has a problem with it, he/she can invite the teacher to make homelife his/her job and support their spouse, or they can use their high earnings to outsource. They don’t get to demand a spouse maintain a full time job earning money outside the home PLUS do all the work of a housewife/SAHP. Pick one or the other.

I don’t know if this pp is dumb or naive. Real life doesn’t work that way.

I don’t know, it’s the way my life is - I make around $300k and my husband makes 10x that. I could quit but we essentially view my job is an insurance policy until we’ve hit our retirement savings goal, which is high. Since we’re both working similar hours, we both put in the same hours at home/with the kids. If/when I do quit, I will pick up much more but in the meantime, it’s about both of us working full time, not money earned.

Your husband makes $3M a year and yet you are working as much as he does for $300k as an “insurance policy”? Do you have anxiety or something?

It's got to be fiction. No one with the chops to earn $3,000,000/ year is going to be so inefficient with their use of time that they would spend any significant amount of it on "household chores."

Lol it’s true. Today he got up at 6 with the baby (let me sleep until toddler got up), just took the trash out and is currently unloading the dishwasher. I’m making breakfast and later taking kid to soccer and doing a run to the storage unit to drop off outgrown baby clothes I’ve packed up. Not sure that is “inefficient” it’s just life.

He can do whatever he wants to do. That's not the point, which is he should not be expected to do anything he does not want to do. Nor does he have to.

If you want to pay someone $1,000/hr. to put out your garbage and empty your dishwasher feel free to do it explicitly, because when your husband does it, that's how much it is costing you, whether you want to admit that or not

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think what the 'dh earns $3m' pp is not saying is that income is not salary. Virtually no one has a $3m salary. It's either that the dh is some kind of equity partner or is in tech where RSAs are in play or it's bonused or he has his own biz. All of which are not static and can easily fluctuate (no way has pp's dh made that income for more than 2-3y running) so the reality is that they aren't just saving bc they have 'ambitious retirement goals', they are saving and pp is still working bc the dh's income is not carved in stone. Our HHI is $750-$1m depending on year and we also do all our own chores for this reason. Once you are at high earning threshhold, until your net worth is at x and is x% liquid, you have to keep being frugal.

If those high levels of income are uncertain year to year then it is even more insane for you to be doing menial household work instead of outsourcing whatever you can. Time is money. Assuming your combined work week is 100 hrs or 5000/yr your hourly time is worth $150-200 just in direct income. That's what you are paying to scrub toilets and sweep floors when you or your spouse do it yourself. It's astounding that such highly laid professionals don't get such a simple concept.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the expectations should be based on work hours, not income. Across the board, pay is not generally reflective of how long or hard you work, some industries just pay a lot more than others.

That said, as someone who earns about 70% more than my husband and feels the after work/dinner scramble, lower the weeknight cooking expectations so one of you can get it on the table fast. We do a lot of leftovers of meals cooked on the weekend, pasta once a week, frozen food once a week, breakfast for dinner, and so on.

+1. It should obviously be based on total work hours, unless 1 person chooses a very intense but low-paying job, which they shouldn’t do with kids. But both OP and her DH work similar hours. Even if a family has a SAHP, both parents need to contribute on evenings and weekends.

This is not living in reality. Should a surgeon who earns 900K with a pre-school teacher husband who earns 70K expect to do a 50/50 split of chores?

If the surgeon works more hours than the preschool teacher, no. If they work the same number of hours, yes. If the surgeon has a problem with it, he/she can invite the teacher to make homelife his/her job and support their spouse, or they can use their high earnings to outsource. They don’t get to demand a spouse maintain a full time job earning money outside the home PLUS do all the work of a housewife/SAHP. Pick one or the other.

I don’t know if this pp is dumb or naive. Real life doesn’t work that way.

I don’t know, it’s the way my life is - I make around $300k and my husband makes 10x that. I could quit but we essentially view my job is an insurance policy until we’ve hit our retirement savings goal, which is high. Since we’re both working similar hours, we both put in the same hours at home/with the kids. If/when I do quit, I will pick up much more but in the meantime, it’s about both of us working full time, not money earned.

You must be hot as hell because this is the dumbest thing I've ever read. If any of this is true, your husband is simply catering to your completely irrational whims.

With a $3,300,000 income NEITHER of you should be saddled with any significant household chores.

Whatever time your husband is wasting doing menial chores that could easily be hired out he could be spending on far more productive activities. That doesn't have to be more hours of his current job. It could be developing intellectual property. It could be researching the stock market or real estate market if you are active investors. Or it could just be relaxing and reading books in his field or figuring out ways to improve his efficiency so he has to spend less time working. Or it could just be listening to classical music, camping, or whatever it is that makes him want to keep earning those kinds of bucks.

You could easily hire help at $50/hour to do all household chores.

Your husband assuming he works a 60 hour week 50 weeks a year grosses $1,000/hr. After taxes say $500/hr.

The same applies to you of course. For you working is entirely optional and you make a very good buck.

No one could make $3,000,000/yr or $300,000 /yr.and be this dumb.

This sounds like the worst life ever. He isn’t allowed to work for or care about anything not related to making money? Even his time relaxing is reading books in his field?

He's allowed to do whatever he wants. He can wash dishes if that relaxes him. But it is costing him $1000/hr to wash dishes. I somehow doubt any same person enjoys washing dishes enough to pay $1000/he for the privilege.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the expectations should be based on work hours, not income. Across the board, pay is not generally reflective of how long or hard you work, some industries just pay a lot more than others.

That said, as someone who earns about 70% more than my husband and feels the after work/dinner scramble, lower the weeknight cooking expectations so one of you can get it on the table fast. We do a lot of leftovers of meals cooked on the weekend, pasta once a week, frozen food once a week, breakfast for dinner, and so on.

+1. It should obviously be based on total work hours, unless 1 person chooses a very intense but low-paying job, which they shouldn’t do with kids. But both OP and her DH work similar hours. Even if a family has a SAHP, both parents need to contribute on evenings and weekends.

This is not living in reality. Should a surgeon who earns 900K with a pre-school teacher husband who earns 70K expect to do a 50/50 split of chores?

If the surgeon works more hours than the preschool teacher, no. If they work the same number of hours, yes. If the surgeon has a problem with it, he/she can invite the teacher to make homelife his/her job and support their spouse, or they can use their high earnings to outsource. They don’t get to demand a spouse maintain a full time job earning money outside the home PLUS do all the work of a housewife/SAHP. Pick one or the other.

I don’t know if this pp is dumb or naive. Real life doesn’t work that way.

I don’t know, it’s the way my life is - I make around $300k and my husband makes 10x that. I could quit but we essentially view my job is an insurance policy until we’ve hit our retirement savings goal, which is high. Since we’re both working similar hours, we both put in the same hours at home/with the kids. If/when I do quit, I will pick up much more but in the meantime, it’s about both of us working full time, not money earned.

Your husband makes $3M a year and yet you are working as much as he does for $300k as an “insurance policy”? Do you have anxiety or something?

It's got to be fiction. No one with the chops to earn $3,000,000/ year is going to be so inefficient with their use of time that they would spend any significant amount of it on "household chores."

Are you not American? People don’t really have servants that wait on them like this in the US, no matter their income. It’s just not socially acceptable. Even billionaires do their own dishes and rake leaves.

Complete nonsense. You have no clue how financially comfortable people live.

There is literally a billionaire living down the street from me out raking leaves this morning.

No one in the US has servants who clear their dishes after every meal.

I have a zillionaire mowing the lawn down the street from me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What many of these responses seem to miss is that there is a fundamental difference between doing a household chore like washing dishes and doing a child-focused "chore" like feeding a baby, reading books to a toddler, helping an elementary kid with homework, overseeing a kid while they help with dinner, etc.

You can outsource a household chore and it has no impact on your relationship with your kids. If you bring someone in to cook and clean, offer them fair wages and treat them respectfully, this should not impact your relationship with your kids one way or the other.

If you bring someone in to do all your child-focused chores, even the ones that occur after you are done workin for the day, you are robbing your kids of important relationship-building with you. I'm not saying it's not okay to ever have a nanny help with feeding or teaching or spending time with kids. Of course they can, and especially with multiple kids, doing so might enable you to spend more quality time with your kids.

But the idea that just because someone is making a certain income, they should be able to outsource ALL parenting-related tasks? That's a really f***ed up view of parenting. The idea that making the money that pays for a child to be fed, clothed, comforted, taught, etc., exempts you from every actually doing those things in person? It makes you little more than a sperm (or egg) donor and benefactor. Parenting is much more about doing than paying. Paying is a baseline requirement for being a parent, but it is not "parenting." If you don't do any actual parenting, you aren't really a parent. You're just a paycheck.

Putting a kid in daycare from 8-6 everyday is pretty much outsourcing being a parent entirely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the expectations should be based on work hours, not income. Across the board, pay is not generally reflective of how long or hard you work, some industries just pay a lot more than others.

That said, as someone who earns about 70% more than my husband and feels the after work/dinner scramble, lower the weeknight cooking expectations so one of you can get it on the table fast. We do a lot of leftovers of meals cooked on the weekend, pasta once a week, frozen food once a week, breakfast for dinner, and so on.

+1. It should obviously be based on total work hours, unless 1 person chooses a very intense but low-paying job, which they shouldn’t do with kids. But both OP and her DH work similar hours. Even if a family has a SAHP, both parents need to contribute on evenings and weekends.

This is not living in reality. Should a surgeon who earns 900K with a pre-school teacher husband who earns 70K expect to do a 50/50 split of chores?

If the surgeon works more hours than the preschool teacher, no. If they work the same number of hours, yes. If the surgeon has a problem with it, he/she can invite the teacher to make homelife his/her job and support their spouse, or they can use their high earnings to outsource. They don’t get to demand a spouse maintain a full time job earning money outside the home PLUS do all the work of a housewife/SAHP. Pick one or the other.

I don’t know if this pp is dumb or naive. Real life doesn’t work that way.

I don’t know, it’s the way my life is - I make around $300k and my husband makes 10x that. I could quit but we essentially view my job is an insurance policy until we’ve hit our retirement savings goal, which is high. Since we’re both working similar hours, we both put in the same hours at home/with the kids. If/when I do quit, I will pick up much more but in the meantime, it’s about both of us working full time, not money earned.

Your husband makes $3M a year and yet you are working as much as he does for $300k as an “insurance policy”? Do you have anxiety or something?

It's got to be fiction. No one with the chops to earn $3,000,000/ year is going to be so inefficient with their use of time that they would spend any significant amount of it on "household chores."

Are you not American? People don’t really have servants that wait on them like this in the US, no matter their income. It’s just not socially acceptable. Even billionaires do their own dishes and rake leaves.

Complete nonsense. You have no clue how financially comfortable people live.

There is literally a billionaire living down the street from me out raking leaves this morning.

No one in the US has servants who clear their dishes after every meal.

I mean, some people definitely do -- there are people with live-in staff who do everything for them, including pick up every dish they use and wash it and put it away for them. But it's a very different way of living. There are things I choose not to outsource because I don't want the incursion on my privacy. I could never have a live-in housekeeper because even if they were a great person, I'd get annoyed having them around.

Your neighbor isn't raking because it's impossible find someone to rake his leaves. He's raking because he enjoys it, or he doesn't like having so many people around his property, or because he feels he can do it better himself.

It is interesting to think about people's motivations for doing chores themselves when they could afford to hire someone else to do it. I think especially with kids, this can tell you a lot about people. I know many parents who could afford to hire in-home nannies or tutors or have someone else cook for their kids or pick them up from school, but choose to do it themselves even if it means getting away form work to do it, because to them that time with their kids is not just a chore, it's important time with their kids.

Missing the point again. Of course a parent who wants to do certain chores or child care tasks is free.to do whatever they want to do and have time to do.

The conflict arises when a parent does NOT want to do certain things and the other parent declares war over it. If someone brings $3,000,000 annual income into the household but aside from that does not care to lift a finger as to any household chores, the low or non earning parent needs to get over themselves and say that's fine honey, you work hard, rest now, I will handle EVERYTHING. Handling everything included using that income to outsource as much stuff as possible. If you're sticking the kid in daycare for 10 hours a day that means everything can be outsourced since youre willing to outsource your kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What many of these responses seem to miss is that there is a fundamental difference between doing a household chore like washing dishes and doing a child-focused "chore" like feeding a baby, reading books to a toddler, helping an elementary kid with homework, overseeing a kid while they help with dinner, etc.

You can outsource a household chore and it has no impact on your relationship with your kids. If you bring someone in to cook and clean, offer them fair wages and treat them respectfully, this should not impact your relationship with your kids one way or the other.

If you bring someone in to do all your child-focused chores, even the ones that occur after you are done workin for the day, you are robbing your kids of important relationship-building with you. I'm not saying it's not okay to ever have a nanny help with feeding or teaching or spending time with kids. Of course they can, and especially with multiple kids, doing so might enable you to spend more quality time with your kids.

But the idea that just because someone is making a certain income, they should be able to outsource ALL parenting-related tasks? That's a really f***ed up view of parenting. The idea that making the money that pays for a child to be fed, clothed, comforted, taught, etc., exempts you from every actually doing those things in person? It makes you little more than a sperm (or egg) donor and benefactor. Parenting is much more about doing than paying. Paying is a baseline requirement for being a parent, but it is not "parenting." If you don't do any actual parenting, you aren't really a parent. You're just a paycheck.

The people who put their kids in daycare all day ARE outsourcing being parents already. Or most of it.

If you really believed what you just posted you would advocate for lower paid spouse to quit work entirely when kids are young and be a full time sah parent for a few years. You can't have it both ways--claim you want to be a parent then stick the kid in daycare when it's not an absolute financial necessity for both parents to work. And for these high income people it's not. Typically they are.just insanely greedy or the lower income spouse is on an ego trip.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think what the 'dh earns $3m' pp is not saying is that income is not salary. Virtually no one has a $3m salary. It's either that the dh is some kind of equity partner or is in tech where RSAs are in play or it's bonused or he has his own biz. All of which are not static and can easily fluctuate (no way has pp's dh made that income for more than 2-3y running) so the reality is that they aren't just saving bc they have 'ambitious retirement goals', they are saving and pp is still working bc the dh's income is not carved in stone. Our HHI is $750-$1m depending on year and we also do all our own chores for this reason. Once you are at high earning threshhold, until your net worth is at x and is x% liquid, you have to keep being frugal.

If those high levels of income are uncertain year to year then it is even more insane for you to be doing menial household work instead of outsourcing whatever you can. Time is money. Assuming your combined work week is 100 hrs or 5000/yr your hourly time is worth $150-200 just in direct income. That's what you are paying to scrub toilets and sweep floors when you or your spouse do it yourself. It's astounding that such highly laid professionals don't get such a simple concept.

That’s… not how it works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What many of these responses seem to miss is that there is a fundamental difference between doing a household chore like washing dishes and doing a child-focused "chore" like feeding a baby, reading books to a toddler, helping an elementary kid with homework, overseeing a kid while they help with dinner, etc.

You can outsource a household chore and it has no impact on your relationship with your kids. If you bring someone in to cook and clean, offer them fair wages and treat them respectfully, this should not impact your relationship with your kids one way or the other.

If you bring someone in to do all your child-focused chores, even the ones that occur after you are done workin for the day, you are robbing your kids of important relationship-building with you. I'm not saying it's not okay to ever have a nanny help with feeding or teaching or spending time with kids. Of course they can, and especially with multiple kids, doing so might enable you to spend more quality time with your kids.

But the idea that just because someone is making a certain income, they should be able to outsource ALL parenting-related tasks? That's a really f***ed up view of parenting. The idea that making the money that pays for a child to be fed, clothed, comforted, taught, etc., exempts you from every actually doing those things in person? It makes you little more than a sperm (or egg) donor and benefactor. Parenting is much more about doing than paying. Paying is a baseline requirement for being a parent, but it is not "parenting." If you don't do any actual parenting, you aren't really a parent. You're just a paycheck.

The people who put their kids in daycare all day ARE outsourcing being parents already. Or most of it.

If you really believed what you just posted you would advocate for lower paid spouse to quit work entirely when kids are young and be a full time sah parent for a few years. You can't have it both ways--claim you want to be a parent then stick the kid in daycare when it's not an absolute financial necessity for both parents to work. And for these high income people it's not. Typically they are.just insanely greedy or the lower income spouse is on an ego trip.

I'm the PP and I did SAHM when my kid was little and still only work PT. That's what worked for me and we're lucky we could afford it.

My DH still does a lot of child-related "chores" because he's a parent and that's parenting. And he did them when I SAHMed too. I obviously do more than he does because I don't work a full-time job so obviously I'm doing more childcare and household stuff. But on days he works from home, he does drop off and often also packs lunch (while I get breakfast and get DC ready for the day) and in the evenings we divide and conquer between dinner and parenting tasks. At that point in the day he's spent a full day working but... so have I. Just because my work is split between a paid job 9-2 and then childcare 2-6 does not mean I did less or should be solely responsible for our evening routine.

Parents parent. It doesn't matter if you make 50k or 500k. Yes people will negotiate different divisions of workload depending on work schedules, preferences, abilities, etc. But the idea that if one partner makes a lot more than the other, they can just skip out on all the parenting stuff is ridiculous. If you don't want to be a parent, don't. But if you have kids, you should expect that you will be spending time taking care of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think what the 'dh earns $3m' pp is not saying is that income is not salary. Virtually no one has a $3m salary. It's either that the dh is some kind of equity partner or is in tech where RSAs are in play or it's bonused or he has his own biz. All of which are not static and can easily fluctuate (no way has pp's dh made that income for more than 2-3y running) so the reality is that they aren't just saving bc they have 'ambitious retirement goals', they are saving and pp is still working bc the dh's income is not carved in stone. Our HHI is $750-$1m depending on year and we also do all our own chores for this reason. Once you are at high earning threshhold, until your net worth is at x and is x% liquid, you have to keep being frugal.

If those high levels of income are uncertain year to year then it is even more insane for you to be doing menial household work instead of outsourcing whatever you can. Time is money. Assuming your combined work week is 100 hrs or 5000/yr your hourly time is worth $150-200 just in direct income. That's what you are paying to scrub toilets and sweep floors when you or your spouse do it yourself. It's astounding that such highly laid professionals don't get such a simple concept.

That’s… not how it works.

That's absolutely how it works. If my time is.worth $200/hr then that's what it is worth. If I choose to do menial household chores rather than hire them out for $25 an hour I need to also understand that I am paying $175/hr to wash dishes.

It's called opportunity cost look it up. You must work for the government where productivity doesn't matter and in fact is frowned upon. Probably a.school teacher.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What many of these responses seem to miss is that there is a fundamental difference between doing a household chore like washing dishes and doing a child-focused "chore" like feeding a baby, reading books to a toddler, helping an elementary kid with homework, overseeing a kid while they help with dinner, etc.

You can outsource a household chore and it has no impact on your relationship with your kids. If you bring someone in to cook and clean, offer them fair wages and treat them respectfully, this should not impact your relationship with your kids one way or the other.

If you bring someone in to do all your child-focused chores, even the ones that occur after you are done workin for the day, you are robbing your kids of important relationship-building with you. I'm not saying it's not okay to ever have a nanny help with feeding or teaching or spending time with kids. Of course they can, and especially with multiple kids, doing so might enable you to spend more quality time with your kids.

But the idea that just because someone is making a certain income, they should be able to outsource ALL parenting-related tasks? That's a really f***ed up view of parenting. The idea that making the money that pays for a child to be fed, clothed, comforted, taught, etc., exempts you from every actually doing those things in person? It makes you little more than a sperm (or egg) donor and benefactor. Parenting is much more about doing than paying. Paying is a baseline requirement for being a parent, but it is not "parenting." If you don't do any actual parenting, you aren't really a parent. You're just a paycheck.

The people who put their kids in daycare all day ARE outsourcing being parents already. Or most of it.

If you really believed what you just posted you would advocate for lower paid spouse to quit work entirely when kids are young and be a full time sah parent for a few years. You can't have it both ways--claim you want to be a parent then stick the kid in daycare when it's not an absolute financial necessity for both parents to work. And for these high income people it's not. Typically they are.just insanely greedy or the lower income spouse is on an ego trip.

I'm the PP and I did SAHM when my kid was little and still only work PT. That's what worked for me and we're lucky we could afford it.

My DH still does a lot of child-related "chores" because he's a parent and that's parenting. And he did them when I SAHMed too. I obviously do more than he does because I don't work a full-time job so obviously I'm doing more childcare and household stuff. But on days he works from home, he does drop off and often also packs lunch (while I get breakfast and get DC ready for the day) and in the evenings we divide and conquer between dinner and parenting tasks. At that point in the day he's spent a full day working but... so have I. Just because my work is split between a paid job 9-2 and then childcare 2-6 does not mean I did less or should be solely responsible for our evening routine.

Parents parent. It doesn't matter if you make 50k or 500k. Yes people will negotiate different divisions of workload depending on work schedules, preferences, abilities, etc. But the idea that if one partner makes a lot more than the other, they can just skip out on all the parenting stuff is ridiculous. If you don't want to be a parent, don't. But if you have kids, you should expect that you will be spending time taking care of them.

Really. So military people in active duty and deployment should not have children. Foreign service officers posted on assignments without their families should not have children. Single moms should have their children taken away since the father is not around.

Got any more "logic" on this topic?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the expectations should be based on work hours, not income. Across the board, pay is not generally reflective of how long or hard you work, some industries just pay a lot more than others.

That said, as someone who earns about 70% more than my husband and feels the after work/dinner scramble, lower the weeknight cooking expectations so one of you can get it on the table fast. We do a lot of leftovers of meals cooked on the weekend, pasta once a week, frozen food once a week, breakfast for dinner, and so on.

+1. It should obviously be based on total work hours, unless 1 person chooses a very intense but low-paying job, which they shouldn’t do with kids. But both OP and her DH work similar hours. Even if a family has a SAHP, both parents need to contribute on evenings and weekends.

This is not living in reality. Should a surgeon who earns 900K with a pre-school teacher husband who earns 70K expect to do a 50/50 split of chores?

If the surgeon works more hours than the preschool teacher, no. If they work the same number of hours, yes. If the surgeon has a problem with it, he/she can invite the teacher to make homelife his/her job and support their spouse, or they can use their high earnings to outsource. They don’t get to demand a spouse maintain a full time job earning money outside the home PLUS do all the work of a housewife/SAHP. Pick one or the other.

I don’t know if this pp is dumb or naive. Real life doesn’t work that way.

I don’t know, it’s the way my life is - I make around $300k and my husband makes 10x that. I could quit but we essentially view my job is an insurance policy until we’ve hit our retirement savings goal, which is high. Since we’re both working similar hours, we both put in the same hours at home/with the kids. If/when I do quit, I will pick up much more but in the meantime, it’s about both of us working full time, not money earned.

You must be hot as hell because this is the dumbest thing I've ever read. If any of this is true, your husband is simply catering to your completely irrational whims.

With a $3,300,000 income NEITHER of you should be saddled with any significant household chores.

Whatever time your husband is wasting doing menial chores that could easily be hired out he could be spending on far more productive activities. That doesn't have to be more hours of his current job. It could be developing intellectual property. It could be researching the stock market or real estate market if you are active investors. Or it could just be relaxing and reading books in his field or figuring out ways to improve his efficiency so he has to spend less time working. Or it could just be listening to classical music, camping, or whatever it is that makes him want to keep earning those kinds of bucks.

You could easily hire help at $50/hour to do all household chores.

Your husband assuming he works a 60 hour week 50 weeks a year grosses $1,000/hr. After taxes say $500/hr.

The same applies to you of course. For you working is entirely optional and you make a very good buck.

No one could make $3,000,000/yr or $300,000 /yr.and be this dumb.

This sounds like the worst life ever. He isn’t allowed to work for or care about anything not related to making money? Even his time relaxing is reading books in his field?

He's allowed to do whatever he wants. He can wash dishes if that relaxes him. But it is costing him $1000/hr to wash dishes. I somehow doubt any same person enjoys washing dishes enough to pay $1000/he for the privilege.

No sane person would say they would pay $1,000 an hour to sleep at night, but you literally can't work 24/7. It doesn't "cost" him $1,000 every hour he is not working because that's not actually possible or how anything works. Like yes, I get that someone making $3 million a year can easily afford a housekeeper, but you can't actually parcel out your OWN life at an hourly rate that way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think what the 'dh earns $3m' pp is not saying is that income is not salary. Virtually no one has a $3m salary. It's either that the dh is some kind of equity partner or is in tech where RSAs are in play or it's bonused or he has his own biz. All of which are not static and can easily fluctuate (no way has pp's dh made that income for more than 2-3y running) so the reality is that they aren't just saving bc they have 'ambitious retirement goals', they are saving and pp is still working bc the dh's income is not carved in stone. Our HHI is $750-$1m depending on year and we also do all our own chores for this reason. Once you are at high earning threshhold, until your net worth is at x and is x% liquid, you have to keep being frugal.

If those high levels of income are uncertain year to year then it is even more insane for you to be doing menial household work instead of outsourcing whatever you can. Time is money. Assuming your combined work week is 100 hrs or 5000/yr your hourly time is worth $150-200 just in direct income. That's what you are paying to scrub toilets and sweep floors when you or your spouse do it yourself. It's astounding that such highly laid professionals don't get such a simple concept.

That’s… not how it works.

That's absolutely how it works. If my time is.worth $200/hr then that's what it is worth. If I choose to do menial household chores rather than hire them out for $25 an hour I need to also understand that I am paying $175/hr to wash dishes.

It's called opportunity cost look it up. You must work for the government where productivity doesn't matter and in fact is frowned upon. Probably a.school teacher.

I guess if you can actually work all waking hours then you shouldn’t do anything except work. Some of us are capped on what we make, no matter how many hours we put in.

[Anonymous]

How is it that there are so many people on DCUM who work so hard that they are in the top 5% of wage earners yet still have enough time to post on DCUM at all hours of the day?